Some observations on waist line

General discussion of skirt and kilt-based fashion for men, and stuff that goes with skirts and kilts.
Post Reply
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 7294
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Lake Goodwin, Washington
Contact:

Some observations on waist line

Post by moonshadow »

Forgive me if this is long, it's more like an essay, really more meant for my website, but I'd thought I'd copy it here in case it warranted further discussion. I'd like to hear you all's thoughts....

You'll have to pardon me if some of this may seem somewhat obvious, understand however that my nature has always been to explore different things. To me, life is more like a all you can eat buffet, rather than a one dish dining meal. Thus, I've explored lots of subjects over the years. And will no doubt continue to do so. Even my interest in buying skirts will no doubt wane eventually. However much like all of the other interest I've perused, even when newer ones come along, I always take a little piece of older ones with me. Therefore, I will most likely continue to wear them frequently, probably for the rest of my life to some extent. I may simply slow down on buying new ones, and simply replace ones that are worn out, as one might do with any other garment. As it stands now, I already have more skirts than I do pants, not counting work pants, which technically arent' my property.

But anyway, I trail off course... In this new found interest in clothing design, I have taken an interest in what people wear, and how they wear it. Little things that I've never noticed before are becoming more obvious. Much like when I began studying the occult, and quickly realized that symbolism of the occult is everywhere. Most people just don't realize it. Same goes with clothing design. I began to notice how people wear their garments, and noticed several patterns and styles varying on gender, age, body type, and personal preference.

One of the more recent observations is the wearing of a garment on the waist or hip. I must confess, I always rather figured they were almost the same thing. I was wrong. Most people agree the waist is considered the slimmest part of the torso, which on many trim and in shape people may be actually above the naval. I never realized how people wear their clothes until I began to look into more skirts and observe how they are intended to be worn.

I've noticed some interesting trends. Now this isn't meant to serve as the standard for how to wear something, but rather, simply meant to illustrate some of the observations I've made over the last few days. And they are somewhat interesting.

I've noticed that old men ten, and young women tend to wear their pants high waisted. Young women of course can be further mentioned as they also wear skirts and tend to be high waisted. However my observation of old ladies is somewhat different, many, especially among those who wear the "religious skirt" type seem to wear their skirts closer to the hip, where younger men wear their pants. Dresses of course are the exception to this, where regardless of age, most dresses I've seen seem to define the waist just above the navel.

I don't honestly know why this is, but from my best guess I'd say that as women get older, their body shape changes to some extent, they may gain a little weight and loose a lot of the hourglass figure of their youth, and thus redefine their waist line as being closer to the hip. However it is interesting to note that womens pants do tend to be more high waisted than men's regardless of age. I believe this gives older, more out of shape women the image of the "double belly", "double stomach", or as one google image defined it, the "double bubble". As men from my age throughout their working years seem to wear their pants on the hip, we often do form somewhat of a gut, however it's typically singular, and hangs over our belt line, in a rather unattractive way I might note.

I've never really paid much attention to the shape of my body before, however I found it interesting that my hip and my waist are almost exactly the same size. However this is not so much because I have a straight body, but rather, over the years, I must admit, my gut as grown somewhat, increasing my pants size from 30" as a teenager, to a tight fitting 36" today. Still not redneck plumber huge, but enough to where it has caught up with my hip size and now they are the same. This basically means I can literally wear lower garments as high or as low as I like without having to change size. Pants can go as high as the inseam will allow, and skirts, for obvious reasons can practically go to my arm pits if I desire (however I don't, it's just an example), and fit the same. That being said, over the course of the last 35 years, my body has formed an official "waist line" of sorts that is most comfortable to me, which is right above my hip, where I wear my pants. The few belted skirts that I have feel best here. However skirts that only have elastic waist (no belt loops) can go higher and still be comfortable. That being said, it seems more natural to my style to wear them lower. I only have one skirt that must be worn high waisted due to the length of the skirt, and I must admit, while it is comfortable, it does feel different when I first put it on, and takes some getting used to during the day. I once tried belting a skirt high waisted, and found that it was the most uncomfortable clothing experience of my life, even worse than wearing starchy pants, especially when I would sit down, or bend over.

Perhaps I'm breaking the rules of skirt wearing by wearing them closer to my hips where my pants sit, but then again, the fact that I'm wearing a skirt at all seems to suggest that I'm already breaking ALL of the fashion rules anyway, so I reasoned, "why not just wear it the way it's most comfortable". After all, many young boys (you know the type) wear their pants well below their waist.

Regardless of what I wear, high waisted or low, I generally don't tuck my shirt in, because I don't like the way it looks. I guess it's the kid in me, the styles I went to school through, but I always thought wearing anything high waisted just looked somewhat dorky. When I wear a skirt that must sit high waisted, my shirt will still hang over to hide it. That being said, even when wearing pants, I've never been known to "sag". No, my belt line actually sits a little higher than that of the kids, yet lower than that of my elders. Then again, I am almost 35 years old.

Tune in next time when I'll discuss the trend of mens short pants, what they look like, possible reasons for the cut, and how they are starting to resemble something like a skirt, especially when viewed from certain angles.
User avatar
Caultron
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4122
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:12 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by Caultron »

moonshadow wrote:...In this new found interest in clothing design, I have taken an interest in what people wear, and how they wear it...
Yes, me too. I think it's part of looking for ideas and experimenting with new looks.
Courage, conviction, nerve, verve, dash, panache, guts, nuts, balls, gall, élan, stones, whatever. Get some and get skirted.

caultron
User avatar
phathack
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 560
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 6:41 pm
Location: DFW Texas, USA

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by phathack »

The biggest problem I have is the fact that a size will vary quite a bit across labels.
One Labels W10 is another Labels W12.
As to pants where they are worn depends on their rise, low rise are worn on the hips. High rise will be above the navel.

I was always under the impression that the Waist Line was at the Navel, I guess that's an old 1960/70's US thing.



:ugeek:
Woman have Fashion, Men have a Uniform.
A skirt wearer since 2004 and a full time skirt wearer since 2020.
User avatar
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2613
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Burnsville MN USA

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by r.m.anderson »

phathack wrote:The biggest problem I have is the fact that a size will vary quite a bit across labels.
One Labels W10 is another Labels W12.
As to pants where they are worn depends on their rise, low rise are worn on the hips. High rise will be above the navel.
I was always under the impression that the Waist Line was at the Navel, I guess that's an old 1960/70's US thing.
:ugeek:
I was always under the impression that the Waist Line was at the Navel, I guess that's an old 1960/70's US thing
Yes that was old school - but when jeans came along that changed - the kind of jeans that had a high waist were the
coveralls (farmer pants) or shortalls (kids play wear). With jeans the waist took a turn south of the navel !

The WAIST can be anywhere between just below the bust (breast/lower bra band) and the hips *** !
The high waist in female fashion is called the "Empire Waist".
Next step below that is the "Navel (Kilt) Waist"
Now we get into the variable zone from the navel to the hips.
High almost at the navel - - -
(Regular) Waist about half way between the navel and the hips.
Low waist can be variable with the wearers fashion - notably female fashion centering right on the hips or inches just above it.

***
AND THEN THE ABOMINATION WAIST "THE CROTCH BAGGY - at any point south of the hips" ###
### how do they keep them from falling down (off) ?

In essence a garment with a waist has to be smaller than the hips to remain in place.
This can be done with elastic zipper/button closing or with belt or suspenders (braces).
A dress or a tunic has the shoulders for fitting independent of a waist.

Regarding SIZING - BEWARE the VANITY FACTOR - men's wear generally is direct inch measurement i.e. Size 32 is waist of 32 inches.
With the other side of the aisle - you can have Juniors Misses Women and a sub factor of Petite and Plus sizing. All of this is with a
scale of odd numbers for Juniors and even for Misses and higher even numbers for Women.
Once upon a time your could use the factor of "20" to determine the inch relationship for female fashion i.e. a Size 12 (+20) =s 32 inches.
For women anything over a size of 10 (I better be careful here - I am talking about serious size measurement territory) is not very complimentary !
So you guys when shopping for that size over 10 be careful !
10-12 - not so bad
14 - you are getting close to trouble
16-18 and more look out - Omar the tent maker may be your fashion guru.
Still yet men's sizing is on a different wearing perspective than women's - the Waist is not so much Hourglass but more cylinder and almost uniform !
So finding something that fits well may have to be altered tailored to be a suitable fit.
Cross dressing forums are of some help with this.

Closing - "It is a terrible thing to let the waist go to waste" - remember diet and exercise maybe of some help. LOL !
"YES SKIRTING MATTERS"!
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 7294
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Lake Goodwin, Washington
Contact:

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by moonshadow »

^^^ This was very helpful.

Regarding the variations in women's measurements, much like everything else in life, it seems that as far as women are concerned, it's got to be COMPLICATED!

And you forgot to mention that Asian sizes (according to ebay) are different that U.S. sizes. Beware! Those Asian girls are pretty petite. Some listings say an XL (their largest size) is equal to a 30" U.S. waist! Too bad too, because some of those skirts rock!
Case in point: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Women-H ... 51c80934df

Two skirts I've ordered online, the Macabi and Mouseworks. The Macabi has tips for men's sizing, and Ryan at Mouseworks seemed to understand my measurements, the skirt fit well. Everything else I've purchased at a brick and mortar store, which is just trial an error, and many visits to the dressing room.

Still it's feasible, I've seen plenty of hardy older mountain women with waist much larger than mine that found skirts to fit. I haven't worked up the courage to ask them where they purchased them for fear I'd get a purse upside the head!
User avatar
Kirbstone
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5801
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 7:55 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by Kirbstone »

On AliExpress, who proffer lots of oriental skirts &c, they mostly offer sizes 2,3,4,& even 5XL to cater for World markets. In the sizing details they tell you in inches exactly what e.g. 3 or 4xl is in the waist. They often state the waist to hem length as well. Lots of items have free delivery, but it is slow.

Tom.
Carpe Diem......Seize the Day !
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 15305
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by crfriend »

r.m.anderson wrote:The WAIST can be anywhere between just below the bust (breast/lower bra band) and the hips *** !
Technically speaking, the "waist" is the narrowest part of the torso, and precisely where that falls can vary from individual to individual. One size does not suit all.

Of note is that the entire notion of "sizing" was brought about by the advent of commercially-manufactured "ready to wear" clothing which evolved along with the Industrial Revolution. Before that, clothing was hand-made in the home, usually by the wife or "farmed out" to someone else who would construct garments for a price -- so, "sizes" did not need to exist as everything was "made to fit". Batch production by machine did away with that for the masses, leaving "tailoring" to the well-to-do who could afford to have it done.

As a matter of practicality, where the waistline of a garment is placed is down to where the designer decides to put it and, in the case of things which are held up at the (natural) waist, or close thereto, must be larger than the waist yet narrower than the hips if the thing isn't going to fall off. In the case of garments which are supported from the shoulders (or atop the bust), this rule does not apply and the designer is free to put the "narrow point" of the garment anywhere desired so long as he entire thing can be got on and off -- e.g. the "Empire Waist" which was popular in the 1700s and remains somewhat for some forms of sleepwear today.
16-18 and more look out - Omar the tent maker may be your fashion guru.
I believe that Marilyn Monroe was a size 16. I am a 14. She looked better than I ever will. Trust me.

I've joked on and off over the years that women's sizing is a bit of a black art -- that's because it's a moving target ("vanity sizing") and the larger number of critical spots on a woman's body which need consideration. Men: chest, gut, waist, inseam. Women: bust, chest, waist, hips, girth, inseam. Do the math, figure out how many permutations and variations, factor in vanity sizing, and then tell me the answer. Really. I'd like to know. After all these years, it's still down to "trial by fitting-room".
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
skirted_in_SF
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:56 am
Location: San Francisco, CA USA

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by skirted_in_SF »

crfriend wrote:I've joked on and off over the years that women's sizing is a bit of a black art -- that's because it's a moving target ("vanity sizing") . . .
Oh boy, I know about vanity sizing. I buy a lot from Lands' End because I know how their sizing fits me. At LE I wear a Medium or 12 in shirts/jackets. I bought a leather jacket from a local store and it's an XL. Luckily the sales person is a friend and she directed me to the right size. I generally wear a 6 (Small) in LE skirts but the Vermont Country Store skirt I'm wearing right now is a Large that I bought using their sizing charts. I think this is the pre-vanity sizing chart. I was afraid it was going to be too big, but washing it once shrunk it just a tad so it is a loose, but comfortable fit with the elastic waist.
Stuart Gallion
No reason to hide my full name 8)
Back in my skirts in San Francisco
dillon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2719
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: southeast NC coast

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by dillon »

I buy from 6PM.com. Sizes vary a lot from brand to brand. I order on the larger side, to be safe. For skirts with elastic waists, I find myself pulling them up a lot...
As a matter of fact, the sun DOES shine out of my ...
User avatar
JeffB1959
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2650
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:19 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by JeffB1959 »

Most of my skirts were bought at Sears and JCPenney. I usually wear a size 14, but have a few 12's I can get into, especially if they have elastic waistbands, anything fitted, I go with 14.
I don't want to LOOK like a woman, I just want to DRESS like a woman.
Sylvain
Active Member
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 1:31 pm
Location: Montréal

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by Sylvain »

crfriend wrote:I believe that Marilyn Monroe was a size 16. I am a 14. She looked better than I ever will. Trust me.
She wore US 12, but would wear 6 or 8 today. Size 16 refers to British sizes.
skirtingtheissue
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 337
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2012 1:25 pm
Location: southern New Hampshire

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by skirtingtheissue »

When I wear jeans (yes, I still wear jeans during the cold and long winters), I wear women's jeans, and I prefer the higher-waisted styles… and MOH often tugs on them, her opinion being that they look nerdy with the waist that high. And sometimes when I wear a skirt she will suggest it's riding too low and that I should pull it up. But that's because she likes the skirt to be above the knee, and the waist is hidden anyway by having the shirt untucked.
When I heard about skirting, I jumped in with both feet!
User avatar
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2613
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Burnsville MN USA

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by r.m.anderson »

Sylvain wrote:
crfriend wrote:I believe that Marilyn Monroe was a size 16. I am a 14. She looked better than I ever will. Trust me.
She wore US 12, but would wear 6 or 8 today. Size 16 refers to British sizes.
British sizes for the Misses are 1 size off the USA component - LINK:

http://www.onlineconversion.com/clothing_womens.htm

Misses sizes are number in even numbers 0-16/18 followed by Plus 16/18 to 24 more.
Juniors sizes are number in odd numbers 1-19 measurements in between the Misses sizing.

Over the course of several years the sizing has been decreasing with the "VANITY FACTOR" !
Marilyn; Jane Russell and Jayne Mansfield were all well endowed with physical stats in double
digits that could not pass user approval today !

NEVER THE LESS GET THE MEASUREMENTS BY THE OLE FASHION METHOD WITH A TAPE MEASURE
Be it in INCHES or CENTIMETERS ignore the vanity sizing.
"YES SKIRTING MATTERS"!
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3644
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: Some observations on waist line

Post by denimini »

r.m.anderson wrote: NEVER THE LESS GET THE MEASUREMENTS BY THE OLE FASHION METHOD WITH A TAPE MEASURE
Be it in INCHES or CENTIMETERS ignore the vanity sizing.
Very good advice - I keep a tape in my back pack when shopping. Most of my skirts are 10 to 12 with a few 14 and even an 8.
My name is Anthony, please accept me for the person that I am.
Post Reply